When LX470 does not cut it...
04-13-09, 02:48 AM
#16
"Remind me...is there an army (anywhere in the world) that uses the TLC100 as their military vehicle of choice??"
Oh, speaking of which, the Australian army you mentioned: TLC70 troop carrier modification. Again, since I lived in AU for some time, believe me or not: the TLC are plentiful on the roads there and people generally like then VERY much. I don't think I ever saw a G-wagen there ever (Sydney and Brisbane areas). At least I would not call it a common sight.
Oh, speaking of which, the Australian army you mentioned: TLC70 troop carrier modification. Again, since I lived in AU for some time, believe me or not: the TLC are plentiful on the roads there and people generally like then VERY much. I don't think I ever saw a G-wagen there ever (Sydney and Brisbane areas). At least I would not call it a common sight.
"Die australische Regierung ordert 1200 Fahrzeuge der G-Klasse von Mercedes-Benz. Der australische Verteidigungsminister, Joel Fitzgibbon, und der CEO von Mercedes-Benz Australien & Pazifik, Wolfgang Schrempp, haben einen entsprechenden Vertrag mit einem Gesamtvolumen von rund 200 Mio. Euro unterzeichnet. Zusätzlich zu dem Belieferungsvertrag wurden eine 30-Jährige Strategievereinbarung und eine 15-Jährige Servicevereinbarung abgeschlossen.
Die Fahrzeuge werden ab 2009 ausgeliefert. Von den 1200 Einheiten werden 600 in der 4x4-Bauform (Allrad-Antrieb mit zwei Achsen) und 600 Stück als 6x6-Konfiguration (Allrad-Antrieb mit drei Achsen) gebaut. Beim 6x6 handelt es sich um eine dreiachsige Neukonstruktion der G-Klasse, welche den besonderen Nutzlast-Anforderungen der australischen Armee Rechnung trägt. Gefertigt wird die Militärversion der G-Klasse in der bewährten und traditionsreichen Produktion in Graz, Österreich. Da die Militärversion der G-Klasse zu großen Teilen baugleich mit Zivilfahrzeugen ist, erzielt Mercedes-Benz bei Forschung, Entwicklung und Produktion hohe Skaleneffekte.
Die Mercedes-Benz G-Klasse wird seit 1979 produziert und gilt mittlerweile als Klassiker. Dank seiner Zuverlässigkeit, Robustheit und nahezu uneingeschränkten Geländegängigkeit auch in schwerstem Terrain setzte sich der Geländewagen nicht nur bei Industrie, Kommunen und Militär sondern auch bei Privatpersonen durch.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation (via google):
The Australian Government Orders 1,200 vehicles in the G-Class from Mercedes-Benz. The Australian defense minister, Joel Fitzgibbon, and the CEO of Mercedes-Benz Australia & Pacific, Wolfgang Schrempp, have a contract with a total volume of around 200 million euros signed. In addition to the supply contract, a 30-year-old strategy agreement and a 15-year-old service agreement.
The vehicles will be delivered from 2009. Of the 1200 Uniform will be 600 in a 4x4 design (all-wheel drive with two axles) and 600 pieces as a 6x6 configuration (four-wheel-drive with three axles) was built. When 6x6 is a triaxial redesign of the G-Class, what the specific payload requirements of the Australian army into account. Made the military version of the G-Class in the proven and traditional production in Graz, Austria. Since the military version of the G-Class largely identical with civilian vehicles, Mercedes-Benz achieved in research, development and production of high economies of scale.
The Mercedes-Benz G-Class will be produced since 1979 and is now regarded as classics. Thanks to its reliability, robustness and virtually unrestricted cross in serious terrain consisted of SUVs not only for industry, municipalities and military but also by private individuals."
04-13-09, 02:50 AM
#17
Another story with same info:
"Australia Taps Winners for $2.6B Vehicle Program
By Gregor Ferguson, SYDNEY
BAE Systems, Daimler Chrysler and local firm Haulmark Trailers Australia have been chosen to replace most of the Australian Defence Force’s current fleet of trucks, trailers and utility vehicles in a program worth $3 billion Australian ($2.65 billion).
Defense Minister Brendan Nelson announced in Brisbane on Oct. 5 that the Australian army will acquire approximately 1,000 Mercedes Benz G-Wagen four-wheel-drive and six-wheel-drive utility vehicles, 2,400 Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) trucks from BAE Systems Mobility and Protection Systems (formerly Armor Holdings), and 3,000 trailers of different sizes from Brisbane-based Haulmark.
Exact numbers and configuration remain subject to contract negotiations, which are expected to take about six months. The vehicles will be acquired under Phase 3 of Project Overlander, which also logged an order in August for 250 armored and mine-protected Bushmaster Infantry Mobility Vehicles (IMV), worth $300 million Australian, from Thales Australia here.
“Many specialist vehicle modules, trailers and all the Bushmasters will be produced in Australia,” Nelson said. “This Australian portion is worth approximately 800 million [Australian dollars].
“When deployed on operations, the vehicles will be capable of being fitted with enhanced protection to reduce the risk to our service men and women from threats such as suicide bombers, improvised explosive devices, land mines, bullets and other projectiles,” he added.
The new trucks will progressively replace the Australian Defence Force’s current inventory of Mercedes Benz Unimog 4-ton trucks and Mack and International heavy trucks and semi-trailers.
Phases 4 and 5 of Project Overlander are slated for funding approval in 2010 and 2012, respectively, according to the head of Project Overlander, Brigadier David O’Brien.
Phase 4 will see the acquisition of a further 1,200 armored light vehicles in the 1- and 2-ton payload class worth an estimated $1.2 billion Australian, he said, while Phase 5 will see the acquisition of about 2,000 unprotected, commercial off-the-shelf trucks and utility vehicles worth about $300 million Australian. These will be used for training and low-risk logistics tasks, he said.
“Protection is a key aspect of Overlander,” O’Brien said. While the G-Wagen four- and six-wheel-drive vehicles will be only lightly protected, many of the 5-, 10- and 16-ton payload FMTVs and semi-trailers will have armored cabs or be capable of carrying Survivability Enhancement Kits (SEK) to protect their crews and occupants in high-threat environments.
The 1,200 protected vehicles to be acquired under Phase 4 of Project Overlander, along with the 1,000 G-Wagens to be ordered under Phase 3, will replace the Army’s current fleet of soft-skinned Landrover four- and six-wheel-drive vehicles. However, O’Brien said, the Special Forces’ long-range patrol vehicles, which are based on the Landrover six-wheel design, will not be replaced under Project Overlander.
A separate, classified procurement program, Project Redfin, is charged with re-equipping the Special Air Service Regiment and the Army’s two commando regiments with new and upgraded vehicles, weapons, communications and other mission equipment, O’Brien said.
Sources at BAE Systems Australia, Adelaide, and DaimlerChrysler Australia/Pacific, Melbourne, said the exact number and configurations of the vehicles to be ordered in Phase 3 would be subject to contract negotiations. The value of Project Overlander to BAE Systems is estimated to be between $1 billion Australian and $1.5 billion Australian, the company said in a statement Oct. 5, and includes payload modules, technical services and spare parts.
It’s likely that most of the vehicles ordered under Phase 3 of Project Overlander will be imported fully assembled and fitted with specialist role equipment such as winches, radios and specialized payload modules in Australia."
"Australia Taps Winners for $2.6B Vehicle Program
By Gregor Ferguson, SYDNEY
BAE Systems, Daimler Chrysler and local firm Haulmark Trailers Australia have been chosen to replace most of the Australian Defence Force’s current fleet of trucks, trailers and utility vehicles in a program worth $3 billion Australian ($2.65 billion).
Defense Minister Brendan Nelson announced in Brisbane on Oct. 5 that the Australian army will acquire approximately 1,000 Mercedes Benz G-Wagen four-wheel-drive and six-wheel-drive utility vehicles, 2,400 Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) trucks from BAE Systems Mobility and Protection Systems (formerly Armor Holdings), and 3,000 trailers of different sizes from Brisbane-based Haulmark.
Exact numbers and configuration remain subject to contract negotiations, which are expected to take about six months. The vehicles will be acquired under Phase 3 of Project Overlander, which also logged an order in August for 250 armored and mine-protected Bushmaster Infantry Mobility Vehicles (IMV), worth $300 million Australian, from Thales Australia here.
“Many specialist vehicle modules, trailers and all the Bushmasters will be produced in Australia,” Nelson said. “This Australian portion is worth approximately 800 million [Australian dollars].
“When deployed on operations, the vehicles will be capable of being fitted with enhanced protection to reduce the risk to our service men and women from threats such as suicide bombers, improvised explosive devices, land mines, bullets and other projectiles,” he added.
The new trucks will progressively replace the Australian Defence Force’s current inventory of Mercedes Benz Unimog 4-ton trucks and Mack and International heavy trucks and semi-trailers.
Phases 4 and 5 of Project Overlander are slated for funding approval in 2010 and 2012, respectively, according to the head of Project Overlander, Brigadier David O’Brien.
Phase 4 will see the acquisition of a further 1,200 armored light vehicles in the 1- and 2-ton payload class worth an estimated $1.2 billion Australian, he said, while Phase 5 will see the acquisition of about 2,000 unprotected, commercial off-the-shelf trucks and utility vehicles worth about $300 million Australian. These will be used for training and low-risk logistics tasks, he said.
“Protection is a key aspect of Overlander,” O’Brien said. While the G-Wagen four- and six-wheel-drive vehicles will be only lightly protected, many of the 5-, 10- and 16-ton payload FMTVs and semi-trailers will have armored cabs or be capable of carrying Survivability Enhancement Kits (SEK) to protect their crews and occupants in high-threat environments.
The 1,200 protected vehicles to be acquired under Phase 4 of Project Overlander, along with the 1,000 G-Wagens to be ordered under Phase 3, will replace the Army’s current fleet of soft-skinned Landrover four- and six-wheel-drive vehicles. However, O’Brien said, the Special Forces’ long-range patrol vehicles, which are based on the Landrover six-wheel design, will not be replaced under Project Overlander.
A separate, classified procurement program, Project Redfin, is charged with re-equipping the Special Air Service Regiment and the Army’s two commando regiments with new and upgraded vehicles, weapons, communications and other mission equipment, O’Brien said.
Sources at BAE Systems Australia, Adelaide, and DaimlerChrysler Australia/Pacific, Melbourne, said the exact number and configurations of the vehicles to be ordered in Phase 3 would be subject to contract negotiations. The value of Project Overlander to BAE Systems is estimated to be between $1 billion Australian and $1.5 billion Australian, the company said in a statement Oct. 5, and includes payload modules, technical services and spare parts.
It’s likely that most of the vehicles ordered under Phase 3 of Project Overlander will be imported fully assembled and fitted with specialist role equipment such as winches, radios and specialized payload modules in Australia."
04-13-09, 02:52 AM
#18
Here is what the Australian army will be getting.
Here is some info on the military G and Unimog: http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/...ilitaire0.html
G:
http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/...di_4x4_-_2.pdf
http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/..._-_6x6_-_2.pdf
http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/...0_cdi_LAPV.pdf
Here is some info on the military G and Unimog: http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/...ilitaire0.html
G:
http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/...di_4x4_-_2.pdf
http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/..._-_6x6_-_2.pdf
http://www.mercedes-benz.nl/content/...0_cdi_LAPV.pdf
04-13-09, 02:57 AM
#19
BTW, do you have any pics of your off-roading adventures? I only remember the picture of you holding a shovel while your LX was stuck in sand/mud.
04-13-09, 03:10 AM
#21
here is the underbody of my G500...notice how clean it is. The transfer case is tucked up above frame. The front control arms (to the right of the picture) are attached to the SIDE of the frame with its own little steel plating to protect it from the side (silver metal plate). Notice how the crossmembers are thick tubes that are welded THROUGH AND THROUGH BOTH sides of the boxed frame. This is why for such a small vehicle, it weighs just as much as the LX470, and more than Land Cruisers.
04-13-09, 08:50 AM
#22
Tigmd99, I absolutely believe you that Australian military (and Canadian, and a good few in Europe) are buying and using the Gs. My point was that the Australian army also used LandCruisers, which sounded like you were not aware of.
If you are trying to convince me that the G is a rugged and good offroad vehicle - I think I agreed with you. There is really one key different point - you chose to own a G at the moment and happy with it, I'm happy with the LX and had better experience with it than with the G. Is there really anything needs to be debated?
And I already agreed, that I prefer evolutional development path of the G (and where it is now at the moment) vs what Toyota has done to the LX.
I published plenty of the off-road pictures here, but got shot by people here for this. So no more, sorry. And ever since I got the 2006 one, I don't feel it is as off-road worthy as was the 98. Just my IMHO. Since I don't mod my cars, as the result I"m not taking it off-road as much as I used to and I am not happy about it.
As to your suggestion regarding comparing the vehicles - I'll have to pass. Sorry, since I never had a single issue with either LX yet (98 since new, and 2006 bought slightly used at 8k; 250k combined milage now), I do not qualify to discuss the reliability. I just feel that I'm happier in the 470 generation than I was in the G. When the time comes to replace the 470, I'll seriously look at a G again. Hope they will stop building then "by hand" and start a proper robotic assembly line.
I don't mind you thinking of me as a 'fanboy'. I'm no expert by any standard. I do what I like, and say what I like. I only jumped on this as I had the direct experience with the original vehicle in this thread. It is just the conversation evolved to how wide spread are the TCLs in many parts of the world. And as a sideline that the Gs never caught up with that in all those years. People just seem to prefer the TLCs, for whatever reason.
Now army is a different thing - different requirements, and most importantly different decision making process. If you ever dealt with government RFPs and tenders you might know. I personally don't agree that my tax dollar is spent buying the Gs here for the Canadian military, but hey - they never asked me
It is a great thing you are so excited about your G. That's the reason these are not extinct by now, which would have been really really sad.
Want me to sum up my experience with the three MB vehicles I had in the past, including the G? It was always love and hate. There was a lot to admire in each, and just shake your head at them other days. Toyota/lexus? Comfortable happiness and consistent satisfaction. Nothing too exciting.
If you are trying to convince me that the G is a rugged and good offroad vehicle - I think I agreed with you. There is really one key different point - you chose to own a G at the moment and happy with it, I'm happy with the LX and had better experience with it than with the G. Is there really anything needs to be debated?
And I already agreed, that I prefer evolutional development path of the G (and where it is now at the moment) vs what Toyota has done to the LX.
I published plenty of the off-road pictures here, but got shot by people here for this. So no more, sorry. And ever since I got the 2006 one, I don't feel it is as off-road worthy as was the 98. Just my IMHO. Since I don't mod my cars, as the result I"m not taking it off-road as much as I used to and I am not happy about it.
As to your suggestion regarding comparing the vehicles - I'll have to pass. Sorry, since I never had a single issue with either LX yet (98 since new, and 2006 bought slightly used at 8k; 250k combined milage now), I do not qualify to discuss the reliability. I just feel that I'm happier in the 470 generation than I was in the G. When the time comes to replace the 470, I'll seriously look at a G again. Hope they will stop building then "by hand" and start a proper robotic assembly line.
I don't mind you thinking of me as a 'fanboy'. I'm no expert by any standard. I do what I like, and say what I like. I only jumped on this as I had the direct experience with the original vehicle in this thread. It is just the conversation evolved to how wide spread are the TCLs in many parts of the world. And as a sideline that the Gs never caught up with that in all those years. People just seem to prefer the TLCs, for whatever reason.
Now army is a different thing - different requirements, and most importantly different decision making process. If you ever dealt with government RFPs and tenders you might know. I personally don't agree that my tax dollar is spent buying the Gs here for the Canadian military, but hey - they never asked me
It is a great thing you are so excited about your G. That's the reason these are not extinct by now, which would have been really really sad.
Want me to sum up my experience with the three MB vehicles I had in the past, including the G? It was always love and hate. There was a lot to admire in each, and just shake your head at them other days. Toyota/lexus? Comfortable happiness and consistent satisfaction. Nothing too exciting.
Last edited by AKoch; 04-13-09 at 08:54 AM.
04-14-09, 04:22 AM
#23
Tigmd99, I absolutely believe you that Australian military (and Canadian, and a good few in Europe) are buying and using the Gs. My point was that the Australian army also used LandCruisers, which sounded like you were not aware of.
Hope they will stop building then "by hand" and start a proper robotic assembly line.
And as a sideline that the Gs never caught up with that in all those years. People just seem to prefer the TLCs, for whatever reason.
Now army is a different thing - different requirements, and most importantly different decision making process. If you ever dealt with government RFPs and tenders you might know. I personally don't agree that my tax dollar is spent buying the Gs here for the Canadian military, but hey - they never asked me
Hope they will stop building then "by hand" and start a proper robotic assembly line.
And as a sideline that the Gs never caught up with that in all those years. People just seem to prefer the TLCs, for whatever reason.
Now army is a different thing - different requirements, and most importantly different decision making process. If you ever dealt with government RFPs and tenders you might know. I personally don't agree that my tax dollar is spent buying the Gs here for the Canadian military, but hey - they never asked me
Hand or robot...it doesn't matter...as it stands, the G is significantly more robust in construction and durability. Again, you simply have to look at how they are constructed and how they are designed...one is designed for military duty with proper off-road equipment and design...the other is designed as a civilian luxury vehicle with compromises to off-road capability. Nothing wrong with either one, but i would not make the jump to say that one is better than the other at their respective strengths.
Civilians prefer TLCs because they are more comfortable...i don't blame them...G-wagens are rough on-road. However, when it comes to roughing it out off-road, the G comes out way ahead.
Just to make you feel better...TLC/LX was not even on the minds of most militaries in the world...because it is NOT a military vehicle by design! Military vehicles have to pass certain requirements in reliability and durability before they are even considered in the selection process.
Last edited by tigmd99; 04-14-09 at 04:32 AM.
04-14-09, 08:25 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Unbelievable. Both cars are exception off road vehicles. The LandCrusier is the only vehicle to go to the North AND South poles. The G-wagon is a LEGEND as well, maybe th the best built vehicle I've been in. Felt like it was made from adamantium 
tigmd99, I don't think everyone agrees here the G-wagon is an immense vehicle and respects it. That said the Lexus LX is maybe just as rugged. Both are used worldwide for the toughest terrains (LandCruiser/Prado).
Its funny to see you try to play how much better the G-wagon is then I see your other car is an Acura TSX, which is just a Euro Accord with Acura badges with a weak 4 cylinder and is not really a luxury vehicle.
See how that sounds? Thats how your points about the G>LX sound. Please be mindful this is an LX forum and again we all respect the original G (before Infiniti, before Pontiac).
tigmd99, I don't think everyone agrees here the G-wagon is an immense vehicle and respects it. That said the Lexus LX is maybe just as rugged. Both are used worldwide for the toughest terrains (LandCruiser/Prado).
Its funny to see you try to play how much better the G-wagon is then I see your other car is an Acura TSX, which is just a Euro Accord with Acura badges with a weak 4 cylinder and is not really a luxury vehicle.
See how that sounds? Thats how your points about the G>LX sound. Please be mindful this is an LX forum
and again we all respect the original G (before Infiniti, before Pontiac).
04-14-09, 09:50 AM
#25
Its funny to see you try to play how much better the G-wagon is then I see your other car is an Acura TSX, which is just a Euro Accord with Acura badges with a weak 4 cylinder and is not really a luxury vehicle.
See how that sounds? Thats how your points about the G>LX sound. Please be mindful this is an LX forum and again we all respect the original G (before Infiniti, before Pontiac).
See how that sounds? Thats how your points about the G>LX sound. Please be mindful this is an LX forum
and again we all respect the original G (before Infiniti, before Pontiac). If you care to read above, then you will see that i do respect the LX...a lot! My brother has one. I even proclaimed it as being a lot better ON-ROAD and is indeed a better all-around vehicle. PLEASE READ THE THREAD AGAIN.
Hey, wanna talk about my Sienna minivan too?? I am up for it. It has the same suspension design as the LX...IFS and rear solid axle.
(This is a joke!)BTW, if you search for my posts in this forum, then you will see that i am quite fair in my assessments. (Oh yeah, i also run the #1 Toyota 4runner forum on the net...so, it is not like that i hate Toyota for any reason.)
Thai.
Last edited by tigmd99; 04-14-09 at 09:54 AM.
04-14-09, 11:36 AM
#26
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ca
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW... I pulled out a G, ML, H3, F150 and a Tacoma with my GX470 collectively this winter on my snowboarding trips since December. From June Mountain to Utah and everywhere in between socal to UT.
04-14-09, 11:55 AM
#27
Tigmd Your Sienna has elastokinematic (or whatever is the right technical term) rear suspension, independent if that surprises you. What you see which looks like a 'rear axle' is a flexible suspension element, the wheels works and move independently. Weird huh?
Take my word for it, I hate military being that US, Russian, German or North Korean. "Military-spec" sounds like a bad word to me. Could it be why I preferred a TLC then?
Your Sienna has elastokinematic (or whatever is the right technical term) rear suspension, independent if that surprises you. What you see which looks like a 'rear axle' is a flexible suspension element, the wheels works and move independently. Weird huh? Take my word for it, I hate military being that US, Russian, German or North Korean. "Military-spec" sounds like a bad word to me. Could it be why I preferred a TLC then?